I made a flash yesterday about Heller, et al  yesterday, but didn’t really comment much on it.  I guess I should comment for the record, that I support the ruling. Personally, I thought the case fairly well cut and dried, given both the language and the cultural context in which that language was written.

The problem, here is that the people involved were arguing not about the constitution, but rather against it, toward a pre-set goal… a policy precluding private gun ownership. What all this boils down to is who is the best at protecting us… we, ourselves, or the government.  No shock, that the left, who never sees a government power it doesn’t like, is on the leading edge of this fight. 

But… Perhaps were the anti-gun types to explain to us how ‘gun free zones’ have prevented thugs from using guns inside them in places like Virginia Tech and so on, they might actually have a case.  History speaks quite loudly in the opposite direction.  Virginia  Tech has a memorial to remind us of the victims of the gun free policy. So too, does Columbine. The thug, in those cases, won, a point which calls into serious question all such efforts of limiting the access of guns to Americans. 

James over at OTB apparently agrees, saying in part…


…it’s hard to see how yesterday’s ruling affected anyone but the targets of said thugs, law-abiding fellow citizens of the District who were unable to own handguns and had to keep rifles and shotguns in a state that rendered them completely useless if their homes were invaded.

Indeed; Or their school, or anywhere else.

Bruce over at Q&O notes this as well, and gives us what is perhaps the best reason to vote against Barack Obama:

 …it was a 5-4 majority. We are one robed lawyer away from being told that the right to keep and bear arms is not a right at all. And there will certainly be more chances for that to happen in the not-too-distant future, because this is going to spawn a number of legal cases in gun-banning cities like Chicago and San Francisco. That we have reached a state where an enumerated right’s existence depends on how Justice Kennedy feels on the particular day he looks at the issue is a travesty.

Water, after all, never stops trying to get over the dam. But places like DC and Columbine and  VT and so many other places stand as mute reminders of the consequences of the misbegotten idea that the government can protect us from ourselves. They stand as a constant reminder.

And by the way, to the foamers, from whcih I’m already getting mail before even posting about this case… : No, the democratic process wasn’t thwarted… just the Democrat one. (Big D) Let’s understand this clearly; The way to deal with such things is amend the constitution, since the law in question runs directly afoul of the constitution, absent such an amendment. When you’re prevented by government action, from mounting an attempt to amend the constitution, get back to me. Until then,  hang it up.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

One Response to “Heller Revisted”


  1. 16 Down » Heller revisted